ZDNet published a reply from Microsoft later that day saying that the updates are not tested against XP and may cause functionality issues with the OS.

Odd as they are in fact the same OS and all during the 13 years that xp was being patch by microsoft the very same patchs went to all xp computers without regard to whether they was lic as a home /professorial computers or the 2003 servers or Embedded os computers.

So they themselves are misleading by carefully phrasing their statement as I am sure they did not check on some computer box label xp home however the testing was done on the same os in any case.

0 Replies

contrex

1

Reply
Sat 31 May, 2014 12:41 am

An issue to note is that the patches (a) will not cover XP components that aren't in the embedded OS, (b) may or may not work in any event. The result of this could be the worst possible scenario from a security standpoint: an insecure machine that customers mistakenly believe IS secure and trusted. "The only thing worse than no security is false security", and all that.

An issue to note is that the patches (a) will not cover XP components that aren't in the embedded OS,

LOL it is my understanding that the embedded OS allowed you to picked the components up to a full xp install so the security offer should need to be for a full xp system.

But is does not matter in any case as no one is forcing you or anyone else to take the patches and for those like myself who are going to be running XP systems patches or no patches for many years into the future there seems little downside.

Next my security is anything but false as I am running up to date browsers in a sandbox under reduce rights cover by an up to date anti virus and and a program that only allowed the programs to run that I had white listed.

OS patches even before the cut off date of XP support is only a small percent of my total security set-up.